Background A significant percentage of patients suffering from Parkinson’s Disease (PD) experience Impulse Control Disorders (ICDs), contributing to reduced quality of life. As they can be managed by reducing the dopamine dosage, the detection of their presence is crucial for PD treatment plan. Nevertheless, they tend to be under-recognized in clinical practice, since routine screening is not common–despite existing instruments that may support clinicians. This work presents a systematic review on the psychometric properties of instruments measuring ICDs in PD, to test whether clinicians dispose of valid tools that may help them in clinical assessment. Method A systematic literature search in three databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) was conducted. Quality of the instruments’ psychometric properties was evaluated with Terwee et al.’s criteria, and methodological quality of the studies was evaluated with the COSMIN Checklist. Results Ten studies examining seven instruments were selected. The Questionnaire for Impulsive- Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease (QUIP) and the Ardouin Scale of Behavior in Parkinson’s Disease (ASBPD) resulted to be the best from a psychometric point of view. Conclusions Though the gold standard for diagnosis remains a detailed diagnostic interview, this review will encourage clinicians to use validated tools to accurately assess ICDs.

Impulse control disorders in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review on the psychometric properties of the existing measures / Izzo, Viola Angela; Donati, Maria Anna; Ramat, Silvia; Primi, Caterina. - In: PLOS ONE. - ISSN 1932-6203. - 14:6(2019). [10.1371/journal.pone.0217700]

Impulse control disorders in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review on the psychometric properties of the existing measures

Donati, Maria Anna;
2019

Abstract

Background A significant percentage of patients suffering from Parkinson’s Disease (PD) experience Impulse Control Disorders (ICDs), contributing to reduced quality of life. As they can be managed by reducing the dopamine dosage, the detection of their presence is crucial for PD treatment plan. Nevertheless, they tend to be under-recognized in clinical practice, since routine screening is not common–despite existing instruments that may support clinicians. This work presents a systematic review on the psychometric properties of instruments measuring ICDs in PD, to test whether clinicians dispose of valid tools that may help them in clinical assessment. Method A systematic literature search in three databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO) was conducted. Quality of the instruments’ psychometric properties was evaluated with Terwee et al.’s criteria, and methodological quality of the studies was evaluated with the COSMIN Checklist. Results Ten studies examining seven instruments were selected. The Questionnaire for Impulsive- Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease (QUIP) and the Ardouin Scale of Behavior in Parkinson’s Disease (ASBPD) resulted to be the best from a psychometric point of view. Conclusions Though the gold standard for diagnosis remains a detailed diagnostic interview, this review will encourage clinicians to use validated tools to accurately assess ICDs.
2019
Parkinson; instruments; validity; reliability
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01g Articolo di rassegna (Review)
Impulse control disorders in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review on the psychometric properties of the existing measures / Izzo, Viola Angela; Donati, Maria Anna; Ramat, Silvia; Primi, Caterina. - In: PLOS ONE. - ISSN 1932-6203. - 14:6(2019). [10.1371/journal.pone.0217700]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Izzo_Impulse-control-disorders_2019.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 641.88 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
641.88 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1279570
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 5
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 7
social impact